Support NeoGAF

[John Mullins]

Hard to tell which one was worse TBH, in IV cars had jellies instead of springs and drove like shit, V had better physics per se, but the driving model where the cars rotate around their own axis wasn't enjoyable either... And another bad thing I find with the cars is that R* doesn't have the licences to use real cars, but so desperately tries to mimic them anyway the cars end up looking absolutely disgusting for an automotive fan, you can easily tell this is an Audi, this is a Lambo etc. but treated with an axe or a machete...

Yeah I remember the jelly suspension thing lol but worse is I think IV had a weird thing that you couldn't just hold down the gas or else it would hit a rev limiter and you'd need to feather it order to move up the gears and actually get the power down and go anywhere. That took away the fun for casual players, but at least they handled well steering wise. As you say the cars rotating around their axis in V, to me that is the absolute worst enjoyment killer. They done it so you can weave in and out of traffic but feels so bad in all other situations, just driving around normally.

The bikes handled amazing in San Andreas, IV and V dumbed down the physics on them from a PS2 game, sad. Now we have an invisible sticky gravity thing that makes it near impossible to crash. When the stakes get removed, so does the thrill of getting it right. You are playing with stabilisers on, on auto pilot, and it feels awful.

 

[MisterBrimstone]

I think the scope will blow us away, graphics will be the current standard at the time.

 

[SoggyBiscuit]

I'm more intrigued by how they can make further advances with world-interactivity. Let us go in every building or have more realistic density of populations. Destruction and physics also high on my personal list of "wants" especially if the world could react to the damage you caused. (shutting off roads or shops if damaged enough)

It's likely a pipe dream. I think R* won't upset the apple cart too much.

 

[kraspkibble]

not mind blowing but it'll look good.

 

[kraspkibble]

I'm more intrigued by how they can make further advances with world-interactivity. Let us go in every building or have more realistic density of populations. Destruction and physics also high on my personal list of "wants" especially if the world could react to the damage you caused. (shutting off roads or shops if damaged enough)

It's likely a pipe dream. I think R* won't upset the apple cart too much.

yeah they ain't changing shit up. why change anything when it sells this well? only when sales start to drop significantly will they panic and try change things.

as for open world gameplay design they have fell behind. so many games do it better. it feels like they are stuck in 2008. there have just been too many fantastic open world games and they do everything so much better.

the only thing Rockstar has going for them now is how good R.A.G.E looks (RDR2 was impressive) and how much detail they put into their maps at face value. their maps lack depth, dynamics, and meaningful gameplay. Los Santos feels like a pretty but static/lifeless map. some games might struggle to get good graphics but they know how to make a map that feels alive and that you can manipulate or change.

 

[John Mullins]

I think the scope will blow us away, graphics will be the current standard at the time.

Na man. It's on record that GTA 6 will be a smaller game. To avoid the crunch they claim (thanks REE) but really we know it means smaller campaign, and online DLC "content" drip fed over years.

 

[Jack Videogames]

There won't be a GTAVI. Enjoy GTAV. Please understand.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Rockstar is going into next generation owning the graphic game.

 

[lukilladog]

I don´t think they want to risk the cash cow (gtav online) any time soon.